CNN's Cuomo Gloats Over Sessions Hesitance to Investigate Clinton

On Wednesday's New Day, CNN's Chris Cuomo gloated over congressional Republicans apparently suffering a setback in their push for an investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a way that it is unlikely that the CNN host would ever do if Democrats experienced a similar setback.

Cuomo brought up the issue by bragging about a segment from Tuesday's show in which Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan had debated the CNN host over whether there should be a special counsel investigating Clinton in which Cuomo had dismissed the effort as "political spitball." Addressing CNN viewers, he recalled:

We tell you, you have to watch New Day because we set the agenda for you. Jim Jordan was on here -- the congressman from Ohio. He was making his very passionate case for why a special counsel was obviously needed to investigate Hillary Clinton. The expectation that he had going into this hearing was that Jeff Sessions would echo that, given what the Department of Justice had just put out in a letter dated the 13th. But listen to what happened.

After showing clips from yesterday's hearing in which Sessions seemed hesitant to appoint a special counsel to investigate Clinton, Cuomo exclaimed, "Ooo!"

The CNN host then added:

Forget about the hypocrisy that what Jim Jordan and others have argued that a special counsel wasn't needed in the form of Bob Mueller -- it should have been congressional, it should have been open -- now he wants to do tit for tat which is why we called it "political spitballing" -- but for Sessions to look at him and say, "No, I don't think so," Jim Jordan has the same position as the President of the United States does on this. How do you think that helped or hurt Sessions?

Referring to reporting by FNC host Shepard Smith, CNN political analyst David Gregory recommended that Rep. Jordan watch Fox News so he can lose interest in investigating Clinton:

<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>

And you've got a congressman out there who doesn't want to talk about an attack on America by the Russians, but who's digging into the conspiracy files to see what he can find out about this business. You know, he should watch -- I'm sure he's watching a lot of Fox News -- he should go back and watch some of what was done on there yesterday where they took apart this uranium deal --

After co-host Alisyn Camerota injected: "On Shepard Smith's show. That's not Fox-wide," Gregory added: "Well, it's the same network. My point is that they're spinning a lot of wheels, and I do think Sessions there asserted himself in a way that the White House might not like."

Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Wednesday, November 15, New Day on CNN:

CHRIS CUOMO: Another thing he did yesterday that might play into your theory about why the President might want to encourage Sessions to take that write-in seat in Alabama is what happened with Jim Jordan. We tell you, you have to watch New Day because we set the agenda for you. Jim Jordan was on here -- the congressman from Ohio. He was making his very passionate case for why a special counsel was obviously needed to investigate Hillary Clinton. The expectation that he had going into this hearing was that Jeff Sessions would echo that, given what the Department of Justice had just put out in a letter dated the 13th. But listen to what happened.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH) FROM CONGRESSIONAL HEARING: It sure looks like a major political party was working with the federal government to then turn an opposition research that quoted some National Enquirer story into an intelligence document. Take that to a FISA court so that they can then get a warrant to spy on Americans associated with President Trump's campaign. That's what it looks like.

JORDAN CLIP #2: Doesn't that warrant naming a second special counsel as 20 members of this committee wrote you three and a half months ago, asking you to do?

ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS: I would say "looks like" is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.

CUOMO: Ooo! Forget about the hypocrisy that what Jim Jordan and others have argued that a special counsel wasn't needed in the form of Bob Mueller -- it should have been congressional, it should have been open -- now he wants to do tit for tat which is why we called it "political spitballing" -- but for Sessions to look at him and say, "No, I don't think so," Jim Jordan has the same position as the President of the United States does on this. How do you think that helped or hurt Sessions?

DAVID GREGORY: Well, I think that, you know, you want to believe that Sessions is strong enough in this role -- independent enough -- that he's taking some steps to shut down this unprecedented demand by the President to say, "We really ought to have a special counsel, you know, looking into this against my political opponent who I've already defeated." And for him to say, "Look, I'm going to have some people look at this so I can go back to the White House and say, "Look, there's no basis for this here." And you've got a congressman out there who doesn't want to talk about an attack on America by the Russians, but who's digging into the conspiracy files to see what he can find out about this business. You know, he should watch -- I'm sure he's watching a lot of Fox News -- he should go back and watch some of what was done on there yesterday where they took apart this uranium deal --

ALISYN CAMEROTA: On Shepard Smith's show. That's not Fox-wide.

GREGORY: Well, it's the same network. My point is that they're spinning a lot of wheels, and I do think Sessions there asserted himself in a way that the White House might not like.

Please support NewsBusters today! [a 501(c)(3) non-profit production of the Media Research Center]

The mission of the Media Research Center is to create a media culture in America where truth and liberty flourish. The MRC is a research and education organization operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and contributions to the MRC are tax-deductible.